Which case demonstrates that consent is not dealt with in appropriation?

DPP v Gomez

5 of 122

Which case demonstrates dishonesty is not dealt with in appropriation?

R v Hinks - D coerced V to give her a large amount of money over 7 months.

6 of 122

Where is property defined and what as?

S4 TA'68 - includes money and all other property, real or personal, including things is action and other intangible objects.

7 of 122

What section defines real property?

S4 (2) - Land/buildings

8 of 122

What case demonstrates things in action?

R v Marshall - right to be enforced (bank account)

9 of 122

What case demonstrates other intangible objects?

Oxford v Moss - Have no physical form (knowledge)

10 of 122

Where is belonging to another defined and what as?

S5 TA'68 - Having possession, ownership or control.

11 of 122

Which case demonstrates that some rights overrule right to possession?

R v Turner

12 of 122

Which case demonstrates that is isn't necessary for V to know they own property?

R v Woodman

13 of 122

Which case demonstrates you give up right to property if you abandon it?

Williams v Phillips

14 of 122

What is set out in S5 (3) TA'68?

If you give property to someone to be dealt with in certain way and they don't, this is theft (Davidge & Bunnett)

15 of 122

What is set out in S5 (4)?

If you receive property by mistake, under legal obligation to try and return it

16 of 122

What is dishonesty?

S2 - Not regarded as dishonest if; a) D believes he has right in law to take property, b) D believes owner would have consented to appropriation, c) owner of property can't be found taking reasonable steps.

17 of 122

What test is used if none of the exceptions in S2 apply?

Ghosh test - Would Ds actions be regarded as dishonest by a reasonable, honest person? Was D aware of this?

18 of 122

What section is intention to permanently deprive in?

Section 6 (1) Theft Act 1968

19 of 122

Which case demonstrates that breaking headphones and returning them is IPD?

DPP v J

20 of 122

Which case demonstrates that taking films, copying them and returning originals is not IPD?

R v Lloyd - Lord Lane if it is in such a changed state all goodness and virtue has gone.

21 of 122

Which case was it said that there was IPD as couldn't return exact bank notes?

R v Velumyl

22 of 122

Which case demonstrates that conditional intent is not sufficient?

R v Easom

23 of 122

Which case demonstrates that intention to treat something as your own is sufficient?

Raphael and Another

24 of 122

ROBBERY

.

25 of 122

Where is robbery defined and what as?

S81 (1) Theft Act 1968 - Using or threatening force immediately before or at time of theft with intention to use threat of force.

26 of 122

Which case demonstrates that all elements of theft must be present?

R v Robinson

27 of 122

Which case demonstrates that amount of force only needs to be small?

Dawson and James - small push to allow another to take wallet.

28 of 122

Which case demonstrates force or threat of force?

Clouden - wrenched shopping bag.

29 of 122

Which case demonstrates that if there is no direct contact, hard to state force applied to person?